1.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
Carcinoma
Esophagus - Surgical
trials

2.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
• The main goal of surgery in esophageal
cancer was good palliation and the cure is
an accident.
- Ronald H. Belsey (1910-2007)

3.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
History
• First excision of Esophagus is done by
Christian Albert Theodor Billroth, an
Austrian surgeon -1872
• Vincenz Czerny (1842-1916) performed the
first successful human resection of cervical
Esophagus in 1877 where he had resected
a carcinoma of cervical Esophagus that
provided patient a one year survival.

4.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
• A Major pioneer in esophageal surgery was
Ivor Lewis (1895 to 1982) who in 1946 made a
substantial advancements with the
introduction of esophagectomy and
esophagogastrostomy
• Surgery has normally been considers the only
option for patients with early stage cancer of
Esophagus until the mid 1980s, later that
other combined modality options became
available to patients

5.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
Treatment of Premalignant Disease
• Photodynamic laser
• Multipolar Electro coagulation
• argon plasma coagulation
• Cryotherapy
• Radio frequency ablation

6.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
• A RCT of 127 Overall,
• 77.4% of patients in the ablation group had
complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia, as
compared with 2.3% of those in the ( PLACEBO)
control group (P<0.001).
• Patients in the ablation group had less disease
progression (3.6% vs. 16.3%, P=0.03) and fewer
cancers (1.2% vs. 9.3%, P=0.045).

7.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
Chance of lymphnode involvement
• m1 and m2 is 0%
• m3 8%
• sm1 17% ( <200 micro meter thickness)
• sm2 30%

8.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
Endoscopic resection
SIZE < 2cm
Not poorly differentiated
No Nodal involvement
Lesion thickness not beyond sm1

9.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
EMR or ESD for superficial
esophageal cancer
• EMR for lesions < 2cm/ ESD for >2cm
• Pooled R0 resection rate – 90%
• If tumor > 2.5cms – R0 resection rate is 85%
• 5 year recurrence rate – EMR (23%) vs ESD (2.9%)

10.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
•If the disease is extensive, or
pT1b(sm2,sm3) esophagectomy is
recommended

11.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
NCCN Guidelines
• Esophagectomy is recommended primary
treatment option for patients with pT1b,N0
tumours and cT2,N0 low risk lesions (
<3cm in diameter and well- differentiated)

12.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
NCCN guidelines
• Preoperative Chemoradiation ( for
Non cervical Esophagus) and
definitive Chemoradiation ( for
cervical Esophagus) are recommended
for patients with cT2,N0 high risk
lesions ( LVI, >3cm, poorly
differentiated) and cT1b-cT2, N+ or
cT3-cT4a, any N tumours

13.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
Transhiatal Esophagectomy
• En-bloc resection is feasible for distal esophageal
tumors
• Laparotomy and cervical approach
• Peritumoral or two field lymph node dissection (
Abdominal and lower mediastinal)
• Cervical anastomosis

14.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

15.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

16.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
• N – 1525 patients
• 79% of them had Adeno carcinoma
• Tumors located in lower third Esophagus in 82%,
middle and upper third in 18%
• In hospital mortality was 3%
• Most common complication was anastomotic leak
(12%), Recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (4.5%)
• 5 year OS was 29%

17.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

18.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

19.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
Transthoracic Esophagectomy

20.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

21.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

22.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

23.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
• Pulmonary complications are more or less
same
• 5 year overall survival was similar – 24%
for transhiatal esophagectomies and 26%
for transthoracic esophagectomies

24.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

25.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

26.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

27.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

28.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
• 30 day mortality high in trans thoracic group (
10.6% vs 7.2%) as was the pulmonary
complications and length of stay ( 4days more)
• Anastomotic stricture and vocal cord palsy was
significantly higher in transhiatal group
• 5 year OS was not statistically different 26.6% in
transthoracic and 25.8% in trans hiatal group

29.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

30.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

31.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

32.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
• New update from the author showed OS 34% in
transhiatal and 36% in transthoracic resection –
though lymphnode retrieval is more in trans
thoracic esophagectomy

33.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
Minimally invasive esophagectomy

34.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
• MIE can be performed safely with an overall
operative mortality of 1.68%
• a median ICU stay of 2 days, and a median
hospital stay of 8 days.
• The morbidity of the procedure was acceptable
and similar to or better than most published
series of open esophagectomy.

35.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
• In preliminary comparison of outcomes between the MIE-
neck and MIE-chest groups, median length of ICU and
hospital stay, overall morbidity, and operative mortality
seemed to be similar between the 2 approaches.
• The 30-day mortality was 0.9% in the MIE Ivor Lewis
group and 2.5% in the MIE-Neck group.
• The incidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) injury
was significantly lower in the Ivor Lewis MIE-chest
group (1%) than in the MIE-Neck group (P < 0.001).

36.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
TIME trial

37.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
• 115 patients were randomly assigned to minimally invasive
esophagectomy and open esophagectomy with the primary
endpoint of post operative infections within 2 weeks of surgery
• Minimally invasive group were associated with statistically
significant reduction pulmonary infections 9% vs 29% and and
also in hospital pulmonary infections were less in MIE ( 12% vs
34%)
• Hospital stay ( 11 vs 14 days)
• there was no difference detected in 30 days or in hospital
mortality and post operative complications rate were similar

38.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
• in-hospital mortality, one patient in the
open esophagectomy group died from
anastomotic leakage and two in the
minimally invasive group from aspiration
and mediastinitis after anastomotic
leakage.

39.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

40.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

41.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

42.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

43.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
• A reduction in in hospital mortality (3% vs 4.6%)
• Pulmonary complications 17.8% vs 20.4
• Other complications are more or less same
• Conclusion: MIE is superior to open
esophagectomy

44.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
Real world data

45.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

46.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

47.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
JCOG 1409
• JAPAN is conducting a RCT with n=300
patients
• End point is Overall survival
• This is largest trial with survival as
outcome in the debate between MIE vs
open esophagectomy

48.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
• Minimally invasive esophagectomy is the
ideal approach to operate esophageal
cancer
• Reduced morbidity with equivalent
oncological outcomes
• No difference in routine community
practice

49.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

50.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
Extended esophagectomy

51.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

52.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
• 174 patients underwent 3 field lymphadenectomy
• A total of 23% of patients with adenocarcinoma and 25%
of those with SCC had positive cervical nodes
• 5 year survival for patients with positive cervical nodes
was 27% for SCC And 12% in adenocarcinoma patients

53.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
• Authors suggest that 3 field
lymphadenectomy may have a role in
patients with SCC and this remains
investigational for patients with
adenocarcinoma

54.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

55.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

56.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
TATA MEMORIAL

57.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
Palliation

58.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
TROG 03.01NCIC CTG ES2

59.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
DUTCH SIREC study group

60.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.

61.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
• If patient requires rapid palliation – laser
or stent placement are recommended
• EBRT with or without Chemotherapy
takes at least 2 weeks to produce
palliation, but once palliation is achieved it
is more durable

62.
PROF S.SUBBIAH et al.
Thank You…..!